Replies

Until you personally and directly answer the question put to you, we cannot proceed.

I wasn't asking what Augustine said, or for his own opinions to be presented in highly truncated manner. Nor did I ask for some presentation from US Bishops (who themselves seemed by turns loathed and praised by Romanists) but I did ask you a direct question, that deserves direct answer. A yes, or a no, would not only suffice, but is required. As also clearly stated, only after that precise question be answered, can we then proceed, to which I will add, you may be surprised as to extent we come to agreement. And is not that which you are pressing for? For me to "agree"?

Yet twice now the simple question has been shied away from, with anything but direct simple answer, substituted...

Neither was I asking for "instruction", nor am I in particular need of it, though I would suffer it much better if the simple question had first been answered.

Yet I will venture some comment towards the "instruction", though be advised will not look kindly upon further discussion or rebuttal of that which I say, if the original question remains not answered with --- a simple yes, or no.

The first bullet point suggests the "accident" or "species" changes, provided if Aristotelian substance theory and hylomorphism be not part of the there unstated definition of the word "substance". That precise word in common usage today (outside of religion and philosophy) carries with it blandly concrete meaning, such as "substance" being near interchangeable with "element" as in regard to Periodic Table. Sans a carrying forward into this era, the Greek philosophy-flavored usages of "substance" and "accident" as Thomas Aquinas applied those, but instead is allowed modern definition or idea of substance to apply, the result is a significant advancement since the Council of Trent, although one subtle and difficult to pin down, hence the pointed question.

Am I talking over your head? Or do you understand the above paragraph? Consider that carefully.

Please remember also, what the title of this thread is upon which we are conversing. Illiteracy of laity concerning "the [Roman] Catholic faith". I daresay the confusion, and much of the table-pounding concerning transubstantiation and the like, is due to either the misunderstanding (never understanding?) or a forgetting of the transformation be said to take place under the forms of the bread and wine, with those outwardly visible forms themselves not having undergone any material change detectible by natural human (physical) senses.

Do you understand the Greek philosophy descriptions for this trans-"substance" description (of what is said to occur) was borrowed from? In it, the word "substance" doesn't quite mean what it does in today's usage...but that's only the beginning of trouble as to how the description is asserted, and understood; with the troubles being more the additional baggage inexorably freighted with the "sole proprietorship" line of thought (concerning the trans-formative process) along with consideration of how Mary (now in Heaven) be now included in the sending of this "bread from Heaven" ---as if she presides over the heavenly aspect of the "body", since she was mother to the Lord's earthly, bodily Incarnation, etc.

Here is the question again;

the underlying "species", the physical elements of Eucharist wafer themselves, remain unchanged?

In the meantime consider also, this;

From Exodus 16
14 When the dew was gone, thin flakes like frost on the ground appeared on the desert floor. 15 When the Israelites saw it, they said to each other, “What is it?” For they did not know what it was.
Moses said to them, “It is the bread the Lord has given you to eat. 16 This is what the Lord has commanded: ‘Everyone is to gather as much as they need..."
17 ...some gathered much, some little. 18 And when they measured it by the omer, the one who gathered much did not have too much, and the one who gathered little did not have too little. Everyone had gathered just as much as they needed.

Skipping a couple of verses, we find this;

21 Each morning everyone gathered as much as they needed, and when the sun grew hot, it melted away.

with that which "melted away" be understood to be in regard to that having not been "gathered"; which offers some refutation towards that which you have presented (bullet point #4) indicating to me that much of later arising "tradition" and surrounding mindset in regards to the Lord's supper (as Paul referred to it) isn't entirely kosher.

There is more, much more that not only could be but should be considered regarding this bread from Heaven (even Christ) including Moses pleading for the people's sake after Exodus 32:10 and that an omer of the manna was to be kept before Him (the Creator) "at all times" which is much significant to this day in light of Eucharist, and our communion with Him. Yet for now...let us begin with a simple answer to a simple question (the one I am attempted to have you answer).

Now you may disagree on other things if you like, or take exception to the manner I address the subject(s), and that would be OK to do so, for that is the prerogative of each of us here. Yet please first answer the *question --- then we may proceed. Be sure to include that answer in preface, or beginning of any further reply. Lacking direct answer, don't expect me to take you seriously, or be in any way tolerant of unasked for "instruction". This forum does not exist as platform for lopsided promotional dissemination of Romanist viewpoint, regardless of the all-out effort by some to "transubstantiate" the religion forum in particular into being so. If one desires to give then they must be willing to take. It is called "conversation".

Now I have left much on your plate, perhaps too much? Yet for us to find agreement of any sort, again, first the simple question must be answered

I really don’t appreciate the sarky nature of your post. Thus,I will make it simple for you if this is what you want to hear of what I believe..

The bread and wine no longer are bread and wine at the consecration in any way-the bread and wine are now fully Christ in His Body, Blood ,Soul and Divinity.

We spiritually believe this and see the full Christ through the eyes of our faith

It’s a Miracle and a mystery that surpasses scientific and human knowledge. I understand why the Eastern Orthodox took issue with Blessed Aquinas trying to explain things further in a scientific manner.

And regarding Exodus 16- there is a whole lot of Typology that has been historically understood

Here is an Example...(sorry about the bad formatting for this part, but you can read the full PDF at http://hebrewca.ipower.com/files/11.10TypologyofMoses.pdf

Manna as a Figure of the Eucharist
The manna that nourished the Israelites for forty years as
they wandered in the desert is a magnificent figure of the
Eucharist that Jesus instituted as a sacrament of spiritual
nourishment. The event is described in Exodus 16:4–35.
After the people blamed Moses for taking them out of
Egypt where they “sat by the fleshpots and ate bread to
the full,” the Lord said to Moses:
“Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the
people shall go out and gather a day’s portion every day, that
I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or not.
On the sixth day, when they prepare what they bring in, it
will be twice as much as they gather daily.” So Moses and
Aaron said to all the people of Israel, “At evening you shall
know that it was the Lord who brought you out of the land of
Egypt, and in the morning you shall see the glory of the Lord.
. . . in the morning dew lay round about the camp. And when
the dew had gone up, there was on the face of the wilderness
a fine, flake-like thing, fine as hoarfrost on the ground. When
the people of Israel saw it, they said to one another, “What
is it?” For they did not know what it was. And Moses said
to them, “It is the bread which the Lord has given you to eat.
This is what the Lord has commanded: ‘Gather of it, every
man of you, as much as he can eat; you shall take an omer
apiece, according to the number of the persons whom each
of you has in his tent.’” And the people of Israel did so; they
gathered, some more, some less. But when they measured it
with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and
he that gathered little had no lack; each gathered according
to what he could eat. And Moses said to them, “Let no man
leave any of it till the morning.” But they did not listen to
Moses; some left part of it till the morning, and it bred worms
and became foul; and Moses was angry with them. Morning
by morning they gathered it, each as much as he could eat;
but when the sun grew hot, it melted. . . . Now the house
of Israel called its name manna; it was like coriander seed,
white, and the taste of it was like wafers made with honey.
And Moses said, “This is what the Lord has commanded:
‘Let an omer of it be kept throughout your generations, that
they may see the bread with which I fed you in the wilder
-
ness, when I brought you out of the land of Egypt.’”
And
the people of Israel ate the manna forty years, till they came
to a habitable land; they ate the manna, till they came to the
border of the land of Canaan.
That Jesus instituted a better kind of manna—miracu
-
lous bread from heaven for our journey through the desert
of this life—is a prime motive of credibility for faith in
Jesus as the Messiah. What Moses won from God for the
Israelites in the desert, Jesus gave to the Church for her
entire pilgrimage through history. Instead of feeding us
with perishable food for forty years, Jesus’ bread from
heaven has nourished the People of God with the divine
life for two thousand years.
26
The manna is a figure of the Eucharist in various respects.
First, because it is “
bread from heaven
.” Normal bread
comes from the earth, in that it is made from grains of
wheat. This bread was rained down on Israel from above.
Thus it is a natural symbol of the fact that the Eucharist
nourishes us with a reality that is not from this earth nor
even from the natural order, but supremely from above. It
is in fact the Word Incarnate. Jesus brings out this figure
in John 6:48–51:
I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the
wilderness, and they died. This is the bread which comes
down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. I
am the living bread which came down from heaven.
The manna also was not the product of human toil like
normal bread, but came down from above as the dewfall.
This prefigures the fact that the Eucharist in its interior
reality is not the fruit of human technology or accomplish
-
ment, but is the supremely gratuitous gift of God.
The manna is a figure of the Eucharist also because it
was something utterly
unknown
to the Israelites, which
is expressed by the name “manna,” which means “what
is it?” This mystery prefigures the Eucharist because it is
the reality of the New Covenant most veiled in mystery.
Transubstantiation, the sacrifice of the Mass, and Holy
Communion, although not contradictory, utterly transcend
everything that pertains to our ordinary experience. The
mysteriousness of the manna as a figure of the supernatural
mystery of the Eucharist is also indicated in Deuteronomy
8:3: “And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you
with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers
know; that he might make you know that man does not
live by bread alone, but that man lives by everything that
proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord.”
27
Furthermore, the manna is a figure of the effects of
grace of the Eucharist in that God gave them each only

I won’t be able to respond for awhile since my mother is very ill and I have much work to do

I wish you Blessings.